Latest news with #BrownAct
Los Angeles Times
18-06-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
Huntington Beach mayor again makes disparaging remark on hot microphone
Huntington Beach Mayor Pat Burns made a disparaging remark on a hot microphone Tuesday night, at the same meeting where the City Council said it would not repeat public comment restrictions that the American Civil Liberties Union alleged violated the Brown Act and speakers' 1st Amendment rights. Burns' remark was made after Wendy Rincon and her daughter Sydney made public comments. After groaning and calling for the next speaker following Sydney Rincon, the microphone picked up Burns muttering what sounded like 'Another f—ing cow' under his breath, although the last word could have been 'coward.' Burns did not respond to Daily Pilot requests for comment. About a year ago, he called then-minority council members Natalie Moser, Dan Kalmick and Rhonda Bolton 'pieces of s**t' after they walked off the dais in protest of an item that Burns had brought forward seeking to affirm the council's commitment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the 1st and 2nd Amendments. Burns' comment Tuesday was not immediately heard by meeting attendees in the theater at the Central Library where the meeting was taking place, but it could be heard by people who were watching the livestream of the meeting online. 'You can hear it on the city's recording,' said Wendy Rincon, who was standing behind her daughter during her comments. 'He can't run from it ... Whether he's saying it about my daughter or the lady who spoke after her, it's kind of subjective. No matter what, he shouldn't be saying it, period. But considering that my cease and desist letter was on the agenda, I don't think it's a stretch to assume he was talking about my daughter and me by default.' The cease-and-desist letter referenced came from Jonathan Markovitz, a free expression and access to government staff attorney for the ACLU, on behalf of Rincon. It claimed that Burns violated the Brown Act, the U.S. Constitution and the state Constitution with his actions during the council's May 6 meeting. In the letter, Markovitz argued that the mayor should not be warning members of the public that they can't make crude gestures or use foul language when providing public comment. Additionally, he should not stop public speakers from addressing individual council members by name. Burns did both at the May 6 meeting, prompting clarification from Huntington Beach City Atty. Mike Vigliotta. '[Speakers] should just address the council, but to the extent they need to mention names, they can,' Vigliotta told Burns. Huntington Beach's code of ethics, adopted in 2016, states that all city elected or appointed officials should treat their fellow city officials, staff, commission members and the public 'with patience, courtesy, civility and respect, even when we disagree on what is best for the community and its citizens.' Sydney Rincon, 22, said she has also spoken at council meetings before. Her comments included noting that the 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment give rights, including freedom of speech and freedom of press. She also commented on Burns wearing an American flag shirt to the meeting, stating that it violated the United States code regarding respect for the flag. 'It does not surprise me that he would respond so maliciously,' said Sydney Rincon, a recent graduate of San Francisco State with bachelor's degrees in cinema and political science, in an interview on Wednesday. 'I think what's important to recognize is that nowhere within my speech that I gave on Tuesday night did I address a personal opinion or a grievance of the council. I merely acknowledged the Constitution and our standing flag code. Even in that commentary, he spoke maliciously of me as a constituent and as a voter in this city.' The council voted unanimously 6-0-1, with Councilman Andrew Gruel absent, that while it was not admitting that Brown Act violations occurred, it would cease, desist from and not repeat the challenged past action. There was no discussion of the agenda item. Burns, Mayor Pro Tem Casey McKeon, Gracey Van Der Mark and now-state Senator Tony Strickland were voted into office in 2022. After Butch Twining, Don Kennedy and Chad Williams were elected last fall, they formed a self-proclaimed all-MAGA council. Wendy Rincon has long been critical of them. She gave the council the middle finger during her public comments at the March 4 meeting and said 'F— you,' critical of Burns limiting the time for public speakers to a single minute. 'After two years of being called a groomer, a pedophile, an indoctrinator, I had reached my limit,' she said following Tuesday night's meeting. 'You know how contentious the library [debate] has been ... and I lost my temper. I stand by it. It's not something that I would normally do, but I think that they kept ratcheting up the hate and the anger. It's like, what do they expect?' She said Wednesday she was considering filing a lawsuit against the city, and had sent an email to Markowitz seeking feedback. 'In this day and age, men just don't get to say that sort of thing,' she said of Burns' remark. 'I don't think that Pat has received that memo yet.'
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
L.A. council members were told a vote could violate public meeting law. They voted anyway
When Los Angeles City Council members took up a plan to hike the wages of tourism workers this week, they received some carefully worded advice from city lawyers: Don't vote on this yet. Senior Assistant City Atty. Michael J. Dundas advised them on Wednesday — deep into their meeting — that his office had not yet conducted a final legal review of the flurry of last-minute changes they requested earlier in the day. Dundas recommended that the council delay its vote for two days to comply with the Ralph M. Brown Act, the state's open meeting law. "We advise that the posted agenda for today's meeting provides insufficient notice under the Brown Act for first consideration and adoption of an ordinance to increase the wages and health benefits for hotel and airport workers," Dundas wrote. The council pressed ahead anyway, voting 12-3 to increase the minimum wage of those workers to $30 per hour by 2028, despite objections from business groups, hotel owners and airport businesses. Read more: L.A. council backs $30 minimum wage for hotels, despite warnings from tourism industry Then, on Friday, the council conducted a do-over vote, taking up the rewritten wage measure at a special noon meeting — one called only the day before. The result was the same, with the measure passing again, 12-3. Some in the hotel industry questioned why Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, who runs the meetings, insisted on moving forward Wednesday, even after the lawyers' warning. Jackie Filla, president and chief executive of the Hotel Assn. of Los Angeles, said the decision to proceed Wednesday gave a political boost to Unite Here Local 11, which represents hotel workers. The union had already scheduled an election for Thursday for its members to vote on whether to increase their dues. By approving the $30 per hour minimum wage on Wednesday, the council gave the union a potent selling point for the proposed dues increase, Filla said. "It looks like it was in Unite Here's financial interest to have that timing," she said. Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who opposed the wage increases, was more blunt. "It was clear that Marqueece intended to be as helpful as possible" to Unite Here Local 11, "even if it meant violating the Brown Act," she said. Harris-Dawson spokesperson Rhonda Mitchell declined to say why her boss pushed for a wage vote on Wednesday after receiving the legal advice about the Brown Act. That law requires local governments to take additional public comment if a legislative proposal has changed substantially during a meeting. Mitchell, in a text message, said Harris-Dawson scheduled the new wage vote for Friday because of a mistake by city lawyers. "The item was re-agendized because of a clerical error on the City Attorney's part — and this is the correction," she said. Mitchell did not provide details on the error. However, the wording on the two meeting agendas is indeed different. Read more: Faced with a $30 minimum wage, hotel investors start looking outside L.A. Wednesday's agenda called for the council to ask city lawyers to "prepare and present" amendments to the wage laws. Friday's agenda called for the council to "present and adopt" the proposed changes. Maria Hernandez, a spokesperson for Unite Here Local 11, said in an email that her union does not control the City Council's schedule. The union's vote on higher dues involved not just its L.A. members but also thousands of workers in Orange County and Arizona, Hernandez said. "The timing of LA City Council votes is not up to us (sadly!) — in fact we were expecting a vote more than a year ago — nor would the precise timing be salient to our members," she said. Hernandez said Unite Here Local 11 members voted "overwhelmingly" on Thursday to increase their dues, allowing the union to double the size of its strike fund and pay for "an army of organizers" for the next round of labor talks. She did not disclose the size of the dues increase. Dundas' memo, written on behalf of City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto, was submitted late in Wednesday's deliberations, after council members requested a number of changes to the minimum wage ordinance. At one point, they took a recess so their lawyers could work on the changes. By the time the lawyers emerged with the new language, Dundas' memo was pinned to the public bulletin board in the council chamber, where spectators quickly snapped screenshots. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
16-05-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
L.A. council members were told a vote could violate public meeting law. They voted anyway
When Los Angeles City Council members took up a plan to hike the wages of tourism workers this week, they received some carefully worded advice from city lawyers: Don't vote on this yet. Senior Assistant City Atty. Michael J. Dundas advised them on Wednesday — deep into their meeting — that his office had not yet conducted a final legal review of the flurry of last-minute changes they requested earlier in the day. Dundas recommended that the council delay its vote for two days to comply with the Ralph M. Brown Act, the state's open meeting law. 'We advise that the posted agenda for today's meeting provides insufficient notice under the Brown Act for first consideration and adoption of an ordinance to increase the wages and health benefits for hotel and airport workers,' Dundas wrote. The council pressed ahead anyway, voting 12-3 to increase the minimum wage of those workers to $30 per hour by 2028, despite objections from business groups, hotel owners and airport businesses. Then, on Friday, the council conducted a do-over vote, taking up the rewritten wage measure at a special noon meeting — one called only the day before. The result was the same, with the measure passing again, 12-3. Some in the hotel industry questioned why Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, who runs the meetings, insisted on moving forward Wednesday, even after the lawyers' warning. Jackie Filla, president and chief executive of the Hotel Assn. of Los Angeles, said the decision to proceed Wednesday gave a political boost to Unite Here Local 11, which represents hotel workers. The union had already scheduled an election for Thursday for its members to vote on whether to increase their dues. By approving the $30 per hour minimum wage on Wednesday, the council gave the union a potent selling point for the proposed dues increase, Filla said. 'It looks like it was in Unite Here's financial interest to have that timing,' she said. Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who opposed the wage increases, was more blunt. 'It was clear that Marqueece intended to be as helpful as possible' to Unite Here Local 11, 'even if it meant violating the Brown Act,' she said. Harris-Dawson spokesperson Rhonda Mitchell declined to say why her boss pushed for a wage vote on Wednesday after receiving the legal advice about the Brown Act. That law requires local governments to take additional public comment if a legislative proposal has changed substantially during a meeting. Mitchell, in a text message, said Harris-Dawson scheduled the new wage vote for Friday because of a mistake by city lawyers. 'The item was re-agendized because of a clerical error on the City Attorney's part — and this is the correction,' she said. Mitchell did not provide details on the error. However, the wording on the two meeting agendas is indeed different. Wednesday's agenda called for the council to ask city lawyers to 'prepare and present' amendments to the wage laws. Friday's agenda called for the council to 'present and adopt' the proposed changes. Maria Hernandez, a spokesperson for Unite Here Local 11, said in an email that her union does not control the City Council's schedule. The union's vote on higher dues involved not just its L.A. members but also thousands of workers in Orange County and Arizona, Hernandez said. 'The timing of LA City Council votes is not up to us (sadly!) — in fact we were expecting a vote more than a year ago — nor would the precise timing be salient to our members,' she said. Hernandez said Unite Here Local 11 members voted 'overwhelmingly' on Thursday to increase their dues, allowing the union to double the size of its strike fund and pay for 'an army of organizers' for the next round of labor talks. She did not disclose the size of the dues increase. Dundas' memo, written on behalf of City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto, was submitted late in Wednesday's deliberations, after council members requested a number of changes to the minimum wage ordinance. At one point, they took a recess so their lawyers could work on the changes. By the time the lawyers emerged with the new language, Dundas' memo was pinned to the public bulletin board in the council chamber, where spectators quickly snapped screenshots.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
Catholic Athletic Assn. meeting ends in dispute over Mission League proposal
The Catholic Athletic Assn., made up of 25 high schools, voted for new leagues as part of a four-year cycle on Wednesday, but the meeting ended in disagreement, disputes and a threat that Mission League schools might leave the organization. Terry Barnum, head of athletics at Harvard-Westlake, submitted two re-leaguing plans as proposals but asked they be withdrawn as had been done in the past. It was refused. One of the plans was adopted by a 14-11 vote for football only, and now Barnum vows to appeal on procedural grounds and believes his fellow Mission League members will look to leave the CAA and form their own area. Barnum and other Mission League representatives wanted the football-only proposal pulled. The fact it wasn't could cause Mission League schools to pull out of the CAA, Barnum said. Advertisement He said that eight years ago in the last CAA meeting on reconfiguring league members, proposals were allowed to be withdrawn, setting a precedent. "We believe precedent and procedures were not followed," Barnum said. "What today showed is that there's an ideological difference and divide in parochial schools and the Mission League," he said. "We will never be in position to control our own destiny and rules will be bent and circumvented in order for the Mission League not to control our destiny." Barnum is well-respected within the CIF hierarchy as a member of the Southern Section executive committee and CAA executive committee. He said he plans to appeal the decision to the Southern Section but first must receive support from fellow Mission League members. His philosophy is to keep Mission League schools together for almost all sports. They are Harvard-Westlake, Crespi, Sierra Canyon, Sherman Oaks Notre Dame, Loyola, St. Francis, Bishop Alemany and Chaminade. The CAA meeting was originally scheduled for last Wednesday, then changed after supposedly not enough time had been given as notice to satisfy the Brown Act. Barnum said he believes the delay was designed to "allow a group of schools to rally themselves around a plan" they wanted. Advertisement Sign up for the L.A. Times SoCal high school sports newsletter to get scores, stories and a behind-the-scenes look at what makes prep sports so popular. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
14-05-2025
- Sport
- Los Angeles Times
Catholic Athletic Assn. meeting ends in dispute over Mission League proposal
The Catholic Athletic Assn., made up of 25 high schools, voted for new leagues as part of a four-year cycle on Wednesday, but the meeting ended in disagreement, disputes and a threat that Mission League schools might leave the organization. Terry Barnum, head of athletics at Harvard-Westlake, submitted two re-leaguing plans as proposals but asked they be withdrawn as had been done in the past. It was refused. One of the plans was adopted by a 14-11 vote for football only, and now Barnum vows to appeal on procedural grounds and believes his fellow Mission League members will look to leave the CAA and form their own area. Barnum and other Mission League representatives wanted the football-only proposal pulled. The fact it wasn't could cause Mission League schools to pull out of the CAA, Barnum said. He said that eight years ago in the last CAA meeting on reconfiguring league members, proposals were allowed to be withdrawn, setting a precedent. 'We believe precedent and procedures were not followed,' Barnum said. 'What today showed is that there's an ideological difference and divide in parochial schools and the Mission League,' he said. 'We will never be in position to control our own destiny and rules will be bent and circumvented in order for the Mission League not to control our destiny.' Barnum is well-respected within the CIF hierarchy as a member of the Southern Section executive committee and CAA executive committee. He said he plans to appeal the decision to the Southern Section but first must receive support from fellow Mission League members. His philosophy is to keep Mission League schools together for almost all sports. They are Harvard-Westlake, Crespi, Sierra Canyon, Sherman Oaks Notre Dame, Loyola, St. Francis, Bishop Alemany and Chaminade. The CAA meeting was originally scheduled for last Wednesday, then changed after supposedly not enough time had been given as notice to satisfy the Brown Act. Barnum said he believes the delay was designed to 'allow a group of schools to rally themselves around a plan' they wanted.
